DCT
4:13-cv-04513
Evolutionary Intelligence LLC v. Sprint Nextel Corp
Key Events
Amended Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Evolutionary Intelligence, LLC (Delaware)
- Defendant: Sprint Nextel Corporation, Sprint Communications Company L.P., Sprint Spectrum, L.P., Sprint Solutions, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Gutride Safier, LLP; Parker Bunt & Ainsworth
- Case Identification: 6:12-cv-00791, E.D. Tex., 12/27/2012
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendants have purportedly committed acts of infringement and transacted business within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile network infrastructure and developer services infringe two patents related to systems for managing and interacting with data using "information containers" with dynamic properties.
- Technical Context: The technology relates to methods for making networked information more dynamic and useful by encapsulating data into intelligent objects whose behavior and relationships evolve based on user interaction and system analysis.
- Key Procedural History: Post-filing, U.S. Patent No. 7,010,536 survived an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding (IPR2014-00086; IPR2014-00812), with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding claims 2-12, 14, and 16 patentable. The complaint itself, filed in 2012, predates this proceeding.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-01-30 | Priority Date ('536 & '682 Patents) |
| 2006-03-07 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 7,010,536) |
| 2010-04-20 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 7,702,682) |
| 2012-12-27 | First Amended Complaint Filing Date |
| 2013-10-23 | IPR Filed against '536 Patent (IPR2014-00086) |
| 2017-07-17 | IPR Certificate Issued for '536 Patent |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,010,536 - "System and Method for Creating and Manipulating Information Containers with Dynamic Registers," issued March 7, 2006
- The Invention Explained:
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the limitations of computer networks where information is static and inert. In such systems, content groupings are fixed, access routes are not intelligently managed, and the information’s utility does not evolve based on user interaction or system analysis (’536 Patent, col. 1:21-2:51).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system of "information containers," which are logically defined data structures that encapsulate information elements. These containers are distinguished by "dynamic registers" that govern their behavior and interactions with other parts of the system based on evolving parameters like time, usage history, and ownership (’536 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:26-38). Figure 4 illustrates a container with registers for tracking its history, active/passive time relevance, and other attributes, allowing the system to intelligently manage and reconstruct information based on observed utility (’536 Patent, Fig. 4).
- Technical Importance: The technology aimed to create a network with inherent intelligence capable of manufacturing more useful information groupings, rather than simply relying on statistical analysis of undefined "hits" or visits to a static resource (’536 Patent, col. 2:50-62).
- Key Claims at a Glance:
- The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the patent, without specifying them (Compl. ¶13). Independent claim 1 is representative.
- Independent Claim 1 recites an apparatus comprising:
- A plurality of "containers," each being a logically defined data enclosure.
- An information element within the container.
- A plurality of "registers" forming part of the container, including registers for a unique ID, a time representation, and active, passive, and neutral time periods.
- A "gateway" attached to the container that controls its interaction with other system components.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 7,702,682 - "System and Method for Creating and Manipulating Information Containers with Dynamic Registers," issued April 20, 2010
- The Invention Explained:
- Problem Addressed: As a continuation of the application leading to the ’536 Patent, this patent addresses the same problem of static network information (’682 Patent, col. 1:20-2:54).
- The Patented Solution: This patent claims a method for using the information container architecture. The method involves receiving a search query and using the system to search the registers of existing containers based on historical interaction data. The system then dynamically creates a new container that encapsulates the identified, responsive containers, updates the new container's registers, and provides the results to the user (’682 Patent, Abstract; col. 29:58-30:21).
- Technical Importance: This patented method provides a way to dynamically package and deliver information in response to user needs, moving beyond a simple list of links to create a new, context-aware information object.
- Key Claims at a Glance:
- The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the patent (Compl. ¶17). Independent claim 1 is representative.
- Independent Claim 1 recites a computer-implemented method comprising the steps of:
- Receiving a search query.
- Searching "first container registers" that contain "historical data" to identify responsive containers.
- "Encapsulating the identified containers in a new container."
- "Updating second container registers" of the identified containers with data about their interaction with the new container.
- Providing a list that characterizes the identified containers.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The "Sprint CDMA and 4G networks, as well as the Sprint Services Framework" (Compl. ¶¶13, 17).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges these accused instrumentalities constitute a "common development framework" that enables developers to access core network and mobile device services (Compl. ¶¶13, 17). The specific functionalities identified as infringing are "location-based services ('LBS') and/or GeoFencing services" (Compl. ¶¶13, 17). The complaint provides limited technical detail on the operation of these services, instead citing a developer-facing URL for a general overview (Compl. ¶¶13, 17). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The complaint provides high-level allegations without detailed claim charts. The following summarizes the apparent infringement theory.
'536 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a plurality of containers, each container being a logically defined data enclosure and comprising an information element having information | The complaint alleges the Sprint Services Framework and its associated networks provide the infringing apparatus, which suggests that logical data structures related to LBS and GeoFencing services function as the claimed "containers." | ¶13 | col. 29:10-14 |
| a plurality of registers... including a first register for storing a unique container identification value... [and other specified time-based registers] | The complaint does not specify which features of the accused services correspond to the various "registers." The infringement theory appears to be that the overall operation of the framework inherently includes data that functions as these registers. | ¶13 | col. 29:15-27 |
| a gateway attached to and forming part of the container, the gateway controlling the interaction of the container with other containers, systems or processes | The complaint does not identify a specific component corresponding to the claimed "gateway" but alleges infringement by the overall framework and networks. | ¶13 | col. 29:28-32 |
'682 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| receiving a search query; | The provision of LBS and GeoFencing services is alleged to infringe, which implies that requests for location data or notifications related to geographic boundaries function as the claimed "search query." | ¶17 | col. 29:58-59 |
| searching... first container registers... said first container registers having defined therein data comprising historical data associated with interactions... | The complaint lacks specific allegations detailing how the accused services search "container registers" or use "historical data." The allegation is based on the general operation of the accused networks and development framework. | ¶17 | col. 29:60-30:2 |
| encapsulating the identified containers in a new container; | The complaint does not describe a specific "encapsulation" process performed by the accused services, but alleges the overall method is performed. | ¶17 | col. 30:3-4 |
| updating second container registers... with data associated with interactions of the identified containers with the new container; and | The complaint does not specify how the accused services perform the "updating" step. | ¶17 | col. 30:5-8 |
Identified Points of Contention:
- Evidentiary Burden: A central issue for the court will be whether Plaintiff can produce evidence to map the specific, detailed limitations of the asserted claims (e.g., "neutral time register," "updating second container registers") onto the high-level architecture of the accused "Sprint Services Framework," given the complaint's lack of detailed infringement contentions.
- Scope Questions: The infringement analysis raises the question of whether the data structures within Sprint's LBS and GeoFencing services can be shown to meet the specific definition of a "container" with the full suite of "dynamic registers" required by the claims of the ’536 Patent.
- Technical Questions: For the ’682 Patent, the analysis will question whether the routine operation of Sprint's network services constitutes the specific claimed method of "encapsulating... containers in a new container" in response to a query, or if there is a fundamental mismatch in the operational logic.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "container"
- Context and Importance: This is the foundational term of the inventions. The entire infringement case hinges on whether data objects within Sprint's networks and framework meet the definition of a "container." Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether the patents apply to the accused technology at all.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes a container broadly as a "logically defined data enclosure" which can encapsulate "any element or digital segment" or even "any system component or process" (’536 Patent, col. 7:64-8:2).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also requires a container to have a "minimum set of attributes coded into dynamic interactive evolving registers" and a "unique network-wide lifelong identity," suggesting a complex, structured object rather than a simple data packet (’536 Patent, col. 3:29-38).
The Term: "gateway"
- Context and Importance: This term defines a key interactive component of the claimed system. Whether an API or other interface in the accused framework qualifies as a "gateway" will be a critical point of dispute.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent describes a gateway as a "logically defined passageway" that can reside on a container or independently within the system (’536 Patent, col. 15:43-46).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent assigns specific, sophisticated functions to the gateway, including gathering and storing register information, governing traffic based on rules, and acting as an "agent of an analysis engine and execution engine," which may support a narrower construction than a standard network interface (’536 Patent, col. 3:55-4:4).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint focuses on direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) ("making, using, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing") (Compl. ¶¶13, 17). It does not plead specific facts to support claims for indirect infringement (inducement or contributory infringement).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central question will be one of evidentiary mapping and claim scope: can the abstract architecture of a "container" with "dynamic registers," as defined in the patents, be mapped onto the concrete technical components of Sprint's network and developer framework, and what evidence will be presented to substantiate the presence of each claimed element?
- A key issue for the '682 patent will be one of methodological operation: does the accused system's process for providing services like LBS inherently perform the specific, multi-step claimed method of dynamically creating a "new container" to encapsulate search results, or is there a fundamental mismatch in the system's operational logic?